This document provides an exegetical analysis of the prophecy in Micah 4:1-8, which foretells the future elevation of Mount Zion and the establishment of YHWH's universal reign in Jerusalem over the nations and a regathered Israel. The paper examines the structure, literary context, genre, form, historical context, and theological affirmations of the passage, and offers insights for Christian application. It includes the Hebrew text of Micah 4:1-8 with notes on translations of key terms and phrases. The overall aim is to provide an in-depth examination of this well-known Old Testament prophecy.

1. In
the
Shadow
of
Mt.
Zion,
We
Will
Walk
in
His
Paths:
An
Exegesis
of
Micah
4:1-­8
Introduction
The
focus
of
this
paper
is
well-­‐known
prophecy
in
Micah
4:1-­‐8
which
foretells
of
future
elevation
of
Mt.
Zion
and
the
establishment
of
YHWH’s
universal
reign
in
Jerusalem
over
the
nations
and
a
regathered
Israel.
It
is
a
vision
of
YHWH
enthroned
as
king
in
Zion.
This
paper
will
take
an
in-­‐depth
look
at
the
structure,
literary
context,
genre,
form,
and
historical
context
of
Micah
4:1-­‐8,
will
offer
exegetical
commentary,
and
analyzes
the
passage’s
theological
affirmations
and
the
insights
it
offers
for
Christian
application.
Translation
of
Micah
4:1-­‐8
1
And
it
shall
be
in
the
days
to
come1
that
the
mountain
of
the
house
of
YHWH
will
be
established2
over
the
mountaintops3
and
it
will
be
raised
higher
than4
the
hills
and
the
peoples
will
stream
to5
it.
2
And
many
nations
will
come
and
they
will
say,
“Come
and
let
1
I
chose
to
translate
My#ImÎ¥yAh tyâîrSjAaV;b
(literally
“in
the
after-­‐part/end
of
the
days”)
as
“in
the
days
to
come”
because
it
maintains
the
prophetic
oracle’s
temporal
ambiguity.
While
this
oracle
is
clearly
oriented
towards
the
future,
it
is
unclear
whether
the
future
in
mind
is
eschatological
(as
Mays
asserts
and
the
translation
“end
of
days”
connotes)
or
merely
a
“change
of
the
times”
(as
Wolff
argues).
Hillers
and
Ben
Zvi
agree
with
Wolff
that
phrase
speaks
to
an
indefinite
future.
BDB
offers
that
My#ImÎ¥yAh tyâîrSjAaV;b
is
a
“prophetic
phrase
denoting
the
final
period
of
the
history
so
far
as
the
speaker’s
perspective
reaches”
and
thus
the
sense
varies
with
context.
See
James
L.
Mays,
Micah,
Old
Testament
Library
(London:
SCM
Press
LTD,
1976),
96;
Hans
Walter
Wolff,
Micah:
A
Commentary,
trans.
Gary
Stansell
(Minneapolis:
Augsburg
Fortress,
1990),
119;
Delbert
R.
Hillers,
Micah,
Hermeneia
(Philadelphia:
Fortress
Press,
1984),
50;
Ehud
Ben
Zvi,
Micah,
Volume
XXIB
–
The
Forms
of
the
Old
Testament
Literature
(Grand
Rapids,
MI:
William
B.
Eerdmans
Publishing
Company,
2000),
95;
and
F.
Brown,
S.
Driver,
and
C.
Briggs,
The
Brown-­Driver-­Briggs
Hebrew
and
English
Lexicon
(Peabody,
MA:
Hendrickson
Publishers,
1906),
31.
2
I
translate
the
verbs
here
combination
with
each
other
because
hÎyDh
in
conjunction
with
the
participle
‹NwøkÎn
exhibits
a
broken
periphrastic
construction.
See
BDB,
227.
3
While
Wolff
favors
construing
b as
beth
essentiae
and
translating
it
“as
the
peak
of
the
mountains”
(see
Wolff,
120),
Hillers
makes
the
case
that
vaêør
in
combination
with
rDhDh
(either
singular
or
plural)
seems
to
always
mean
“mountain-­‐tops”
(Gen.
8:5,
Ex.
19:20,
etc.).
See
Hillers,
49.
4
This
is
the
comparative
use
of
NIm;
see
Wolff,
120.
5
Hillers
asserts
that
with
the
sense
of
rAhÎn
in
doubt
on
account
of
its
rarity,
“there
is
no
firm
basis
for
choice
of
the
proper
preposition.”
Isaiah
2:2,
a
parallel
passage
opts
for
the
preposition
lRa
instead
and
thus
I
translate
lAo
as
such.

2. us
go
up
to
the
mountain
of
YHWH
and
to
the
house
of
the
God
of
Jacob
that6
he
may
teach
us
of
his
ways
and
let
us
walk
in
his
paths
for
instruction
will
go
out
from
Zion
and
the
word
of
YHWH
from
Jerusalem.
3
And
he
will
arbitrate7
between
many
peoples
and
he
will
settle
disputes
for
mighty
nations
from
afar8
and
they
will
beat
their
swords
into
plowshares
and
their
spears
into
pruning
hooks;
nation
will
no
longer
lift
up
sword
against
nation
and
they
will
no
longer
train
for
war.
4
But9
each
man
will
sit
under
his
vine
and
under
his
fig
tree
and
none
shall
terrify
him
for
the
mouth
of
YHWH
of
hosts
has
spoken.
5
Though10
all
peoples
walk
each11
in
the
name
of
his
god
but
we12
will
walk
in
the
name
of
YHWH
our
God
forever
and
ever.
6
On
that
day,
the
oracle
of
YHWH,
I
will
gather
the
lame
[lit.
“the
one
who
limps”]13
and
the
banished
and
I
will
assemble
together
he
whom14
I
have
afflicted.
7
And
I
will
make15
the
limper
into
a
remnant
and
the
one
removed
far
off
into
a
mighty
nation
and
YHWH
will
rule
over
them
in
Mount
Zion
from
now
and
forevermore.
8
6
I
translate
the
w
here
as
voluntative
“that
he
may”
since
it
is
paired
with
a
jussive
verb.
See
BDB,
251.
7
I
translate
yE;b£ f#ApDv◊w
as
“arbitrate
between”
instead
of
the
more
traditional
“judge
between”
since
the
imagery
here
is
the
“arbitration
of
warring
nations”
(Wolff,
122)
rather
than
divine
punishment.
The
parallel
verb
Ajy¢Ikwøh◊w
“to
settle
disputes”
supports
this
translation.
8
Hillers
attests
to
the
adjective
use
of
the
prepositional
phrase
qwóøj∂r_dAo;
see
Hillers,
50.
9
The
w
here
has
a
disjunctive
sense
and
this
is
indicated
by
the
fact
that
normal
syntax
is
altered
with
the
conjunction
prefixed
to
the
subject
instead
of
the
verb.
I
translate
it
with
an
adversative
sense.
10
Wolff
argues
that
the
concessive
meaning
of
yI;k
should
be
employed
here,
since
it
stands
in
contrast
with
the
earlier
movement
of
the
oracle.
See
Wolff,
123.
11
Literally
“a
man,”
but
here
vy™Ia
has
a
distributive
sense.
12
This
is
another
adversative,
disjunctive
w.
13
This
might
be
properly
translated
with
the
substantive
“the
lame,”
but
I
wanted
to
in
some
way
preserve
the
explicit
sense
of
xDlAo
as
“limp”
on
account
of
its
historical
connection
with
the
patriarch
Jacob
(Gen.
32:32).
14
The
w
here
functions
as
a
pronominal
antecedent
rather
than
a
conjunction.
See
BDB,
81.
15
Wolff
contends
that
MyIc + -l
means
“to
transform”
as
in
Mic.
1:6,
thus
I
render
it
“make
into.”
See
Wolff,
124.

3. To
you,16
tower
of
the
flock,
the
fortified
hill
of
the
daughter
of
Zion,
to
you
shall
it
come
and
the
former
dominion
shall
arrive,
sovereignty
for
the
daughter
of
Jerusalem.
Structure
of
Micah
4:1-­‐8
I. The
Elevation
of
Zion,
the
Mountain
of
the
House
of
YHWH,
Over
the
Mountaintops
(vv.
1-­‐5)
A. Divine
promise
of
Zion’s
elevation
and
YHWH’s
redemption
of
the
nations
(vv.
1-­‐4)
B. Israel’s
confession
of
loyalty
(v.
5)
II. The
Gathering
of
the
Remnant
of
Jacob
(vv.
6-­‐7)
A. The
oracle
of
YHWH
concerning
the
end
of
exile
(vv.
6-­‐7a)
B. YHWH’s
kingship
over
Israel
in
Zion
(v.
7b)
III. Israel’s
Sovereignty
Restored
(v.
8)
Micah
4:1-­‐8
is
made
up
of
three
distinct
complexes
of
prophetic
sayings.
These
complexes
are
united
as
a
single
literary
unit
around
the
issue
of
Zion’s
future.
“Zion”
is
explicitly
mentioned
in
all
three
complexes
(vv.
2,
7b,
and
8).
Introductory
and
concluding
formulae
establish
the
boundaries
between
the
complexes.
The
first
complex
begins
in
verse
1
with
the
introductory
formula
“and
it
shall
be
in
the
days
to
come”
and
ends
in
verse
5
with
the
concluding
formula
“forever
and
ever.”
Likewise
the
second
complex
begins
in
verse
6
with
“on
that
day,
the
oracle
of
YHWH”
and
concludes
in
verse
7
with
“from
now
and
forevermore.”
Each
complex
has
its
own
thematic
unity
and
primary
voice.
The
first
complex
is
concerned
with
the
elevation
of
Zion
and
YHWH’s
interaction
with
the
nations.
In
this
complex,
YHWH
is
always
spoken
of
in
the
third
person.
The
second
complex
is
concerned
with
gathering
together
of
Israelite
exiles
and
their
reconstitution
as
the
remnant
of
Jacob.
In
this
complex,
YHWH
primarily
speaks
in
16
Hillers
argues
this
is
a
casus
pendens,
the
emphasis
of
one
component
of
a
clause
by
putting
it
first
and
then
repeating
it
in
its
proper
placement
in
the
clause
(ÔKyâ®dDo).

4. the
first
person,
what
Wolff
refers
to
as
“messenger
speech.”17
The
third
complex
is
the
most
difficult.
Wolff,
Mays,
Hillers,
and
Ben
Zvi
all
recognize
verse
8
as
an
independent
unit
despite
Wolff’s
claim
that
it
exhibits
“no
stylistic
or
thematic
break.”18
While
lacking
a
formal
introductory
formula,
Ben
Zvi
identifies
an
introduction
“made
by
vocatives,”
the
casus
pendens
translated
as
“to
you.”19
This
complex
exhibits
further
coherence
by
the
fact
that
all
the
verbs
have
a
third
person,
feminine
singular
subject.
Much
of
this
verse’s
complexity
can
be
attributed
to
its
function
as
a
“Janus,
double
duty
unit,”
a
unit
that
both
faces
the
previous
pericope,
serving
to
conclude
it,
while
also
facing
Micah
4:9-­‐
5:1,
providing
textual
coherence
between
the
two
pericopes.20
Literary
Context
In
terms
of
immediate
literary
context,
Micah
4:1-­‐8
is
set
between
Micah’s
announcement
of
the
utter
destruction
of
Jerusalem
in
3:12
(“Zion
shall
be
plowed
as
a
field;
Jerusalem
shall
become
a
heap
of
ruins,
and
the
mountain
of
the
house
a
wooded
height”)21
and
an
older22
complex
of
three
“daughter
of
Zion”
prophecies
(Micah
4:9-­‐5:1)
that
alternate
between
oracles
of
woe
(with
their
descriptions
of
a
present
experience
of
conquest
and
exile)
and
promises
of
deliverance.
Micah
3:12
serves
as
the
final
word
in
the
prophet’s
program
of
judgment
spoken
against
Samaria
and
Jerusalem,
which
has
been
the
focus
of
Micah
1-­‐3.
Micah
4:1-­‐8,
a
salvation
oracle
focused
on
the
establishment
of
Jerusalem
as
the
seat
of
YHWH’s
reign,
17
Wolff,
115.
18
Ibid.
19
Ben
Zvi,
109.
See
also
Hillers,
56.
20
Ben
Zvi,
108.
21
Unless
otherwise
indicated,
all
Scripture
quotations
outside
of
Micah
4:1-­‐8
are
from
the
English
Standard
Version.
22
Wolff,
116.

5. stands
not
only
in
stark
contrast,
but
as
an
antithetical
challenge
to
what
comes
before.23
While
Micah
3:9-­‐12
is
concerned
with
Jerusalem’s
imminent
future,
Micah
4:1-­‐8
looks
beyond
to
a
far
distant
future
when
the
sentence
laid
upon
Jerusalem
will
be
reversed
and
YHWH
will
“change
Zion’s
status.”24
Ben
Zvi
(who
holds
to
post-­‐exilic
setting
for
the
passage)
sees
Micah
4:1-­‐8
as
a
hopeful
reassurance
that
“the
past
destruction
of
monarchic
Jerusalem
…
has
certainly
not
abrogated
YHWH’s
choice
of
Jerusalem.”25
Thus
to
Ben
Zvi
it
functions
in
its
literary
setting
as
the
post-­‐exilic
community’s
reaffirmation
of
order
in
the
face
of
chaos.26
The
relationship
of
Micah
4:1-­‐8
to
the
pericope
that
follows
is
more
difficult
to
determine.
Mays
sees
Micah
4:9-­‐5:1
as
an
explication
of
how
the
prophecy
of
Micah
4:8,
a
salvation
oracle
concerning
the
return
of
dominion
to
Jerusalem,
will
be
fulfilled
in
Israel’s
history.27
Ben
Zvi
sees
the
subsequent
pericope
as
providing
“a
set
of
future
scenarios
that
are
not
logically
congruent,”
alternative
visions
of
the
future
that
both
complement
and
contrast
with
the
vision
of
salvation
offered
in
Micah
4:1-­‐8.28
In
later
visions
of
the
book,
YHWH
is
placed
in
a
more
adversarial
relationship
with
the
nations
and
the
center
of
salvific
hope
shifts
from
Zion/Jerusalem
to
Bethlehem
(Mic.
5:2).
Genre
and
Form
Micah
4:1-­‐8
is
a
collection
of
three
salvation
oracles
(vv.
1-­‐4,
vv.
6-­‐7,
and
v.
8)
that,
in
words
of
Ben
Zvi,
“delineates
a
horizon
of
an
ideal
future
by
suggesting
a
kind
of
23
Wolff,
117.
24
Rick
Byargeon,
“The
Relationship
of
Micah
4:1-­‐3
and
Isaiah
2:2-­‐4:
Implications
For
Understanding
the
Prophetic
Message,”
Southwestern
Journal
of
Theology
46,
no.
1
(2003):
20.
25
Ben
Zvi,
96.
26
Ibid.,
104.
27
Mays,
7.
28
Ben
Zvi,
123.

6. dialogue
among
different
yet
related
images
of
that
future.”29
In
the
midst
of
these
oracles,
verse
5
is
inserted
as
a
confessional
statement
of
Israel’s
covenant
loyalty.
The
pericope
contains
many
of
the
motifs
that
characterize
the
salvation
oracle
genre.
It
functions
as
a
counterpoint
to
the
preceding
oracles
of
judgment,
moving
from
a
description
of
present
distress
to
a
promise
of
its
reversal
by
an
event
of
salvation.
It
begins
with
the
introductory
formula
“and
it
shall
be
in
the
days
to
come”
which
signifies
a
“change
of
times,”
a
temporal
turning
point
that
reinforces
the
motif
of
reversal.30
Furthermore,
much
of
the
passage’s
imagery
evokes
the
restoration
of
a
state
of
well-­‐
being
as
Zion
is
“established”
and
the
scattered
and
ravaged
flock
of
exiles
is
“gathered”
and
“gathered
together.”
Finally
the
genre
of
a
prophetic
oracle
is
suggested
because
certain
sections
(particularly
vv.6-­‐7a)
are
directly
associated
with
the
voice
of
YHWH.
This
tripartite
structure
(with
its
three
announcements
of
salvation)
seems
to
reflect
the
tripartite
concerns
of
a
community
in
exile
with
verses
1-­‐4
emphasizing
the
restoration
of
land
and
temple
as
the
seat
of
YHWH’s
reign,
verses
6-­‐7
focusing
on
the
regathering
and
reconstitution
of
the
nation,
and
verse
8
concentrating
on
the
return
of
sovereignty
and
kingship.
Historical
Context
The
historical
context
of
Micah
4:1-­‐8
is
much
debated.
In
terms
of
the
passage’s
historical
context
in
the
world
within
the
text,
the
final
editor/redactor
attributes
the
oracle
(by
virtue
of
its
inclusion
in
this
work)
to
the
prophetic
ministry
of
Micah
the
Moreshite
in
the
latter
half
of
the
8th
century
B.C.,
“in
the
days
of
Jotham,
Ahaz,
and
Hezekiah,
kings
of
Judah”
(Mic.
1:1),
before
the
Babylonian
exile.
Scholars
like
Mays
reject
Micah’s
authorship
29
Ibid.,
103.
30
Wolff,
119.

7. of
4:1-­‐8
on
the
basis
that:
1)
it
lacks
stylistic
and
vocabulary
parallels
with
the
“genuine”
oracles
in
Micah1-­‐3;
2)
its
message
stands
in
sharp
contrast
with
those
genuine
judgment
oracles
and
with
Micah’s
conception
of
his
vocation
in
Micah
3:8;
3)
the
oracle
contradicts
the
prophecy
Micah
is
most
famously
remembered
for
in
the
generation
following
his
death
(see
Jeremiah
26:18);
and
4)
the
oracle
draws
on
elements
of
Zion
theology
that
most
scholars
attribute
to
exilic
or
post-­‐exilic
times.31
However
Hillers
rebuts
Mays
point
for
point,
claiming:
1)
too
small
of
a
sample
size
to
accurately
analyze
Micah’s
“style”
and
the
discovery
of
some
parallel
(albeit,
at
times,
insignificant)
vocabulary
between
our
pericope
and
the
genuine
oracles;
2)
the
possibility
that
Micah
3:8
was
not
intended
to
be
an
all-­‐
encompassing
statement
of
Micah’s
mission;
3)
the
reality
that
Micah
4:1-­‐8
does
not
preclude
an
earlier
fulfillment
of
the
devastation
of
Jerusalem;
and
4)
that
the
aspirations
and
imagery
of
Zion
theology
are
not
limited
to
exilic
and
post-­‐exilic
periods.32
Hillers
points
to
the
work
of
J.J.M.
Roberts
who
postulated
that
many
of
the
elements
of
Zion
theology
were
likely
formulated
in
the
days
of
the
united
monarchy
and
thus
they
function
here
as
an
ideal
future
that
contrasts
with
the
present
corrupt
conditions
Micah
is
speaking
against.33
Moving
from
the
world
within
the
text
to
the
world
of
the
text,
one
can
explore
the
historical
context
of
the
text
by
speculating
about
its
uses
within
the
life
of
ancient
Israel.
Some
scholars
like
Wolff
regard
that
Micah
4:1-­‐4
(and
its
parallel
in
Isaiah
2:2-­‐4)
as
a
liturgy
of
dedication
for
the
second
temple
on
account
of
its
“joyful
character”
and
its
utilization
of
motifs
common
to
Mesopotamian
temple
dedication
hymns
such
as
“the
31
Mays,
95.
32
Hillers,
52-­‐53.
33
Ibid,
53.

8. grandeur
of
the
mount
of
God”
and
the
pilgrimage
of
the
nations.34
Hillers
sees
Micah
4:5
(Israel’s
confession
of
covenant
loyalty)
functioning
as
the
liturgical
response
of
a
congregation
to
the
prophetic
oracle.35
While
intriguing,
the
text
gives
no
indication
of
a
particular
setting
or
audience.
While
the
pericope
assumes
the
existence
of
a
temple
on
Mt.
Zion
(the
so-­‐called
“house
of
YHWH”
in
verse
1),
it
gives
no
indication
if
this
is
Solomon’s
temple,
a
hoped-­‐for
future
temple
or
a
rebuilt
second
temple.
While
the
text
also
assumes
the
existence
of
Israelite
exiles,
it
gives
no
indication
whether
the
exiles
are
presumed
to
be
from
Sennacherib’s
campaign,
the
Babylonian
conquests,
or
the
repatriated
Jews
who
returned
in
the
Persian
period,
but
considered
themselves
“still
in
exile,
…
still
in
need
of
YHWH’s
restoration,
and
still
powerless.”36
It
is
as
if
the
author
made
a
conscious
decision
to
leave
the
text
historically
ambiguous.
Ben
Zvi
concludes,
“The
text
suggests
that
the
readers
are
to
contextualize
rather
than
historicize
when
they
approach
the
text.”37
Exegesis
I. The
elevation
of
Zion,
the
mountain
of
the
house
of
YHWH,
over
the
mountaintops
(vv.
1-­5)
The
introductory
formula
“and
it
shall
be
in
the
days
to
come”
places
what
follows
in
a
far
distant
future.
The
formula
emphasizes
that
future’s
hidden
nature.38
The
prophet
offers
a
vision
of
the
future
that
is
currently
obscured
from
his
reader’s
view
by
the
pronouncement
of
Jerusalem’s
destruction
in
the
preceding
verse.
This
vision
of
the
future
focuses
on
Mt.
Zion,
the
city
of
Jerusalem,
and
the
temple,
“the
house
of
YHWH”
and
“the
house
of
the
God
of
Jacob.”
In
this
new,
idealized
future,
the
geography
of
the
34
Wolff,
118.
35
Hillers,
51.
36
Ben
Zvi,
111.
37
Ibid.,
110.
38
Wolff,
119.

9. land
is
transformed
to
better
reflect
the
cosmic
economy.
Mt.
Zion,
“the
mountain
of
the
house
of
YHWH,”
will
be
elevated
and
“established,”
firm,
unshakeable,
and
permanent,
over
and
above
the
world’s
mountaintops.
This
elevation
is
in
defiance
of
Zion’s
topographical
insignificance,
in
defiance
of
its
promised
destruction,
and
in
defiance
of
all
other
divine
mountains.
The
phrase
“the
mountain
of
the
house
of
YHWH”
is
actually
quite
rare
in
the
Hebrew
Bible,
appearing
only
the
parallel
passage39
Isaiah
2:1
and
2
Chronicles
33:15
in
the
context
of
King
Manasseh
of
Judah’s
religious
reforms
in
the
7th
century
BC.
The
derivative
phrase
“the
mountain
of
the
house”
appears
only
in
the
preceding
verse
(Mic.
3:12)
and
in
Jeremiah’s
quotation
of
that
same
oracle
(Jer.
26:18).
The
term
emphasizes
the
presence
of
YHWH
(notice
that
the
divine
name
is
omitted
when
Zion’s
devastation
is
referenced)
and
attributes
the
mountain’s
pre-­‐eminence
to
its
status
as
YHWH’s
dwelling
place.
Wolff
reads
this
as
a
polemic
against
the
other
divine
mountains
in
the
ancient
Near
Eastern
world.40
The
prophet
is
claiming
that
the
ancient
Near
Eastern
mythological
motif
of
a
deity
ensconced
in
a
palace
atop
mountain
uttering
judgments
over
the
nations
finds
its
reality
in
the
low
hill
of
Zion.
Through
an
act
of
prophetic
imagination,
the
prophet
is
revealing
a
glimpse
of
that
obscured
future
reality.
The
establishment
of
Zion
as
the
seat
of
YHWH’s
cosmic
reign
has
implications
for
the
nations
who
function
as
the
chief
protagonists
of
this
salvation
oracle.
(In
this
first
section,
various
terms
for
the
nations,
such
as
“many
peoples”
and
“mighty
nations
from
39
There
exists
a
strong,
almost
verbatim
textual
parallel
between
Micah
4:1-­‐4
and
Isaiah
2:2-­‐4.
Scholars
debate
inconclusively
as
the
tradition’s
authorship
and
the
textual
relationship
between
the
two
passages.
Byargeon
tentatively
suggests
Micah
borrowed
from
Isaiah
while
Wolff
points
to
a
lively
oral
tradition
and
Hillers
declares
it
“fatuous”
to
suppose
the
debate
can
be
settled.
Byargeon,
25.
Hans
Walter
Wolff,
“‘Swords
into
Plowshares’:
Misuse
of
a
Word
of
Prophecy?”,
Currents
in
Theology
and
Mission
12,
no.
3
(1985):
141.
Hillers,
53.
40
Ibid.,
120.

10. afar”
are
repeated
seven
times
in
five
verses.)
The
elevation
of
Zion
initiates
of
pilgrimage
of
the
nations
to
Jerusalem,
a
motif
regularly
found
in
prophetic
literature.41
The
nations
“stream”
to
“the
mountain
of
YHWH”
and
“the
house
of
the
God
of
Jacob”
as
they
previously
streamed
to
Bel
in
Babylon
(Isa.
51:44).
Yet
they
go
up
to
Jerusalem
not
to
bring
tribute
(Hag.
2:7)
or
to
return
exiles
(Isa.
49:22)
or
even
to
make
a
confession
of
devotion
(Isa.
45:14),
but
in
hope
that
they
might
learn
“the
ways”
and
“the
paths”
of
YHWH.
They
ascend
to
Zion
anticipating
YHWH’s
instruction
and
prophetic
word
going
out
to
the
nations.
It
is
interesting
to
note
that
in
this
vision
of
an
idealized
future
neither
priests,
the
practitioners
of
torah
nor
prophets,
the
practitioners
of
the
debar-­
yehwah
are
spoken
of.
This
omission
seems
to
be
part
of
the
prophet’s
larger
critique
of
the
failure
of
Israel’s
leaders
(Mic.
3:9-­‐12).42
In
elevated
Zion,
it
is
YHWH
who
adjudicates,
YHWH
who
teaches,
and
YHWH
who
divines.
There
are
significant
religious,
political,
and
social
implications
to
the
nations’
decision
to
learn
to
walk
in
YHWH’s
paths.
Walking
in
the
paths
of
a
deity
involves
submission
to
that
deity
and
a
delegitimization
of
all
other
gods
(cf.
Mic.
4:5).43
This
submission
leads
to
a
dramatic
transformation
of
the
international
political
order
as
the
nations
turn
to
YHWH
for
justice
and
for
the
arbitration
of
regional
disputes.
His
justice
ushers
in
a
comprehensive
peace;
the
prophet
employs
the
traditional
description
of
a
change
from
wartime
to
peacetime:
“and
they
will
beat
their
swords
into
plowshares
and
their
spears
into
pruning
hooks”
(v.
3).
Yet
this
is
more
than
change
of
seasons;
this
is
the
end
of
cycle
of
warfare
for
the
nations
will
“no
longer
train
for
war.”
The
nations
will,
41
Mays,
97.
Wolff,
121.
42
Hillers,
51.
43
Walter
Brueggemann,
“‘Vine
and
Fig
Tree’:
A
Case
Study
in
Imagination
and
Criticism,”
Catholic
Biblical
Quarterly
43,
no.
2
(Apr.
1981):
190-­‐191.

11. of
their
own
volition,
permanently
convert
their
limited
metallic
resources
(cf.
1
Sam.
13:20-­‐21)
to
serve
agrarian
rather
than
military
needs
or
to
quote
Mays,
“to
cultivate
life
instead
of
crafting
death.”44
The
vision
then
shifts
from
to
the
political
implications
to
the
social:
“but
each
man
will
sit
under
his
vine
and
under
his
fig
tree
and
none
shall
terrify
him”
(v.
4).
Disarmament
and
the
end
of
the
cycle
of
warfare
allows
“personal
agrarian
dream[s]
of
well-­‐being”
to
flourish.45
The
imagery,
often
co-­‐opted
in
imperial
propaganda
(1
Kings
4:25,
2
Kings
18:31,
Isa.
36:16),
is
of
someone
secure
in
the
possession
of
their
ancestral
land,
in
good
relationship
with
their
neighbors
(Zec.
3:10),
and
free
from
the
fear
of
either
invasion
or
the
seizures
and
burdens
of
the
military
state.46
This
is
in
line
with
Micah’s
larger
theme
of
a
return
to
the
kin-­‐based
system
that
is
undisturbed
by
Israel’s
corrupt
leaders.
Concluding
with
the
phrase
“none
shall
terrify
him,”
the
prophet
hearkens
back
to
Israel’s
oldest
hope
(Lev.
26:6).
The
section
ends
with
Israel’s
confession
of
covenant
faithfulness.
At
the
present,
conditions
do
not
reflect
the
prophetic
vision.
The
nations
still
walk
in
the
paths
of
their
gods.
The
cycle
of
international
warfare
continues
unabated.
Individuals
do
not
rest
secured
in
their
ancestral
lands.
Yet
clinging
to
this
prophetic
promise,
Israel
will
walk
in
the
path
that
will
be
the
ultimate
destiny
of
all
nations.
In
the
interim
and
in
light
of
the
divine
instruction
and
the
prophetic
word
that
has
already
gone
out
from
Zion,
Israel
liturgically
resolves
to
“walk
in
the
name
of
YHWH
our
God
forever
and
ever”
(v.
5b).
II. The
gathering
of
the
remnant
of
Jacob
(vv.
6-­7)
44
Mays,
98.
45
Brueggemann,
193.
46
Mays,
98.
Brueggemann,
192.

12. The
introductory
formula
“on
that
day”
places
the
events
of
this
salvation
oracle
in
the
same
indefinite
future
as
the
events
of
Micah
4:1-­‐4.
The
secondary
formula,
“the
oracle
of
YHWH,”
serves
to
both
draw
the
reader’s
attention
and
to
indicate
a
change
of
voice
to
the
divine
first
person.
47
Consequently
this
oracle
is
concerned
not
with
the
Gentiles
nations
but
with
the
exiles
of
Israel,
YHWH’s
true
constituency
in
Zion.
Here
the
prophet
returns
to
the
vocabulary
of
the
first
announcement
of
salvation
in
Micah
2:12.
We
again
see
the
paired
verbs
‘asap
(“to
gather”)
and
qabas
(“to
assemble
together”).
The
imagery,
explicit
in
Micah
2:12
but
implicit
in
Micah
4:6-­‐7a,
is
of
a
shepherd
regathering
a
ravaged,
scattered
flock,
a
cultural
referent
for
the
regathering
of
exiles.
In
the
ancient
Near
East,
there
appeared
to
be
a
ritual
connection
between
the
removal
of
a
sheep
from
its
fold
and
the
threat
of
exile.
This
connection
between
exiles
and
scattered
sheep
can
be
seen
in
the
754
BC
treaty
between
Ashunirari
V
of
Assyria
and
Mati’ilu
of
Arpad.
The
treaty
was
sealed
with
the
following
curse,
“If
Mati’ilu
sins
against
(this)
treaty
…
then,
just
as
this
spring
lamb,
brought
from
its
fold,
will
not
behold
its
fold
again,
also,
Mati’ilu,
together
with
his
sons,
daughters,
officials,
and
the
people
of
his
land
[will
be
ousted]
from
his
country,
will
not
return
to
his
country,
and
not
behold
his
country
again.”48
The
prophet
describes
the
exiles
as
“banished,”
“removed
far
off,”
“afflicted,”
and
“lame.”
(The
prophet
uses
feminine
singular
substantive
adjectives
here
to
refer
to
the
flock
as
a
whole,
not
to
different
individuals
or
groups.)
This
last
descriptor
(hassole`ah)
literally
translates
as
“the
one
who
limps”
and
serves
to
identify
the
flock
with
the
47
Ben
Zvi,
108.
48
In
Hillers,
55.

13. patriarch
Jacob,
the
only
individual
in
the
Old
Testament
with
whom
this
verb
is
predicated
(Gen.
32:31).
These
are
explicitly
Israelite
exiles
(cf.
Zeph.
3:19).
While
YHWH
is
regarded
as
the
agent
responsible
for
the
exiles’
troubles
(“he
whom
I
have
afflicted”),
he
is
also
agent
responsible
for
their
restoration.
He
will
transform
them
into
“a
remnant”
and
a
“mighty
nation”
over
whom
he
will
rule
as
king
with
the
latter
term
clearly
echoes
the
mighty
Gentile
nations
of
verse
3.
Typically
in
classical
prophecy,
“remnant”
(se’erit)
speaks
to
“the
status
of
the
people
created
by
judgment.”49
The
remnant
is
the
few
who
survived
disaster.
But
here
the
term
is
clearly
intended
to
be
positive
for
it
is
placed
in
parallel
with
“a
mighty
nation.”
In
the
oracle,
“remnant”
speaks
of
the
community
“created
by
God’s
saving
activity”
and
they
are
“by
character
a
mighty
nation
…
a
supernatural
and
invincible
reality
within
world
history.”50
Like
Zion,
the
remnant
is
established
firm
and
immovable
for
perpetuity.
III. Israel’s
sovereignty
restored
(v.
8)
In
contrast
to
our
previous
salvation
oracles,
which
were
directed
at
populations,
this
oracle
is
addressed
a
personified
place,
a
place
referred
to
alternately
as
migdal-­eder
(“tower
of
the
flock”)
and
the
ophel
(“fortified
hill”)
of
the
daughter
of
Zion.
Migdal
Eder
is
mentioned
in
only
twice
in
the
Hebrew
Bible:
here
and
in
Genesis
35:21
in
the
context
of
the
wanderings
of
the
patriarch
Jacob.
The
prophet
is
consciously
locating
the
people
of
Zion’s
historic
identity
in
the
figure
of
Jacob.
Migdal
is
a
nomen
loci
et
instrumentalis
derived
from
the
verb
gadal
which
means
to
“make
great.”
It
is
the
place
where
a
people
are
made
great,
a
“fortified
tower
…
around
which
a
small
population
is
grouped.”51
This
49
Mays,
101.
50
Ibid.
51
Ibid.,
103.

14. population
is
specified
as
“the
flock,”
a
clear
reference
to
the
exilic
remnant,
the
regathered
flock
of
YHWH,
from
the
previous
section.
Ophel
is
placed
in
parallel
with
“tower
of
the
flock”
and
may
be
meant
as
a
synonym.
The
term
speaks
of
a
fortified
hill
or
acropolis
and
topographically
refers
to
southeast
ridge
between
the
Kidron
and
Tyropoeon
Valleys
on
whose
lower
reaches
the
City
of
David
was
built.52
The
prophet
here
is
using
“traditional
epithets”
for
the
city
of
Jerusalem
“to
remind
the
city
of
its
past
and
to
assure
its
inhabitants
that
they
shall
again
have
a
future”53
It
is
to
these
locations
that
the
prophetic
announcement
of
the
return
of
memshalah
“dominion”
and
mamlakah
“sovereignty”
is
directed.
Memshalah
speaks
of
the
abstract
notion
of
authority
and
right
to
rule
or
by
extension
the
realm
in
which
such
authority
is
exercised.54
It
can
be
spoken
of
in
the
context
of
individuals
(Isa.
22:21,
1
Kings
9:19,
2
Kings
20:13),
peoples
(Jer.
51:28),
heavenly
bodies
(Gen.
1:16),
and
YHWH
himself
(Ps.
145:13).
Mamlakah
is
roughly
equivalent
to
the
English
word
“kingdom”
and
speaks
of
sovereignty
and
dominion.
It
has
a
broad
semantic
range
and
can
be
used
to
refer
to
a
political
entity
(1
Sam.
10:18,
“the
kingdoms
that
were
oppressing
you,”
1
Sam.
24:20,
“the
kingdom
of
Israel”)
or
the
realm
of
an
individual
or
ruling
house
(Deut.
3:4,
“the
kingdom
of
Og”).
Interestingly,
1
Samuel
13:13-­‐14
uses
mamlakah
to
speak
of
the
“kingdom
[of
Saul]
over
Israel”
that
will
not
endure.
Thus
the
biblical
author
is
making
a
distinction
here
between
the
status
of
a
dynasty
and
the
political
entity
of
Israel.
Biddle
argues
that
the
prophet
is
utilizing
Mesopotamian
and
Persian
concepts
of
52
Ibid.
In
later
eras,
Ophel
refers
to
the
quarter
of
the
city
of
Jerusalem
between
the
City
of
David
and
the
Temple
Mount
(2
Chron.
27:3,
33:14;
Neh.
3:26,
11:21).
53
Daniel
J.
Simundson,
“The
Book
of
Micah:
Introduction,
Commentary,
and
Reflections,”
in
vol.
7
of
The
New
Interpreter’s
Bible
(Nashville,
TN:
Abingdon
Press,
1996),
567.
54
BDB,
606.

15. dominion.
He
argues
that
memshalah
and
mamlakah
should
be
understood
abstractly
as
the
dominion
and
sovereignty
the
gods
bestow
upon
a
city,
granting
it
the
right
to
rule
irrespective
of
the
holders
of
that
authority.55
This
dominion
once
bestowed
upon
a
city
can
be
removed
and
transferred
to
another
seat
of
authority
(cf.
Lamentation
over
the
Destruction
of
Sumer
and
Ur,
II.
364-­‐369).
The
Septuagint’s
translation
of
Micah
4:8
affirms
this
interpretation
for
it
inserts
that
dominion
shall
arrive
“from
Babylon,”
the
seat
to
which’s
Zion’s
sovereignty
had
been
transferred
during
the
Babylonian
exile.56
It
is
also
interesting
to
note
that
while
the
prophet
is
promising
the
return
of
sovereignty
and
dominion
to
Jerusalem,
he
does
not
link
this
restoration
of
kingship
with
the
Davidic
dynasty.
Indeed
the
prophet
has
been
consistent
to
focus
on
YHWH
alone
as
leader
and
king
of
Israel.
Theological
Affirmations
and
Application
The
central
theological
affirmation
of
Micah
4:1-­‐8
is
that
the
coming
destruction
of
Jerusalem
does
not
abrogated
YHWH’s
choice
of
Zion
as
the
seat
of
his
reign.
Yet
this
theological
affirmation
is
more
nuanced
that
the
imperial
claims
of
the
united
monarchy’s
Zion
theology.
Micah’s
theological
affirmation
permits
both
the
death
and
rebirth
of
Zion.
In
his
seminal
work
The
Prophetic
Imagination,
Walter
Brueggemann
writes
that
is
the
task
of
the
prophet
to
“nurture,
nourish,
and
evoke
a
consciousness
and
perception
alternative
to
the
consciousness
and
perception
to
the
consciousness
and
55
Mark
E.
Biddle,
“Dominion
Comes
to
Jerusalem:
An
Examination
of
Developments
in
the
Kingship
and
Zion
Traditions
as
Reflected
in
the
Book
of
the
Twelve
with
Particular
Attention
to
Micah
4-­‐5,”
in
Rainer
Albertz,
James
Nogalski,
and
Jakob
Wöhrle,
eds.
Perspectives
on
the
Formation
of
the
Book
of
the
Twelve:
Methodological
Foundations
–
Redactional
Processes
–
Historical
Insights
(Boston:
De
Gruyter,
2012),
260-­‐
262.
56
Ibid.,
259.

16. perception
of
the
dominant
culture
around
us.”57
Micah’s
oracle
criticizes
the
royal
status
quo
with
its
implicit
rebukes
of
Israel’s
leaders
and
their
policies
of
militarism
and
usurpation
that
inhibit
Micah’s
glorious
vision
of
the
future.
From
Micah’s
perspective,
Jerusalem
must
be
destroyed
for
Zion
to
be
elevated
as
the
place
where
YHWH
is
king,
judge,
priest,
and
prophet.
But
Micah’s
oracle
also
energizes
the
people
to
walk
in
the
ways
of
YHWH
because
offers
them
a
vision
of
the
world
and
the
future
currently
hidden
that
is
rooted
in
the
new,
free
activity
of
God.
This
future
is
rooted
in
YHWH’s
character,
both
his
universalism
(as
God
of
the
nations)
and
his
covenant
faithfulness
(his
hesed)
to
Israel.
So
what
is
our
application
as
Christians?
When
early
church
read
this
passage,
they
saw
Zion
lifted
up
as
a
symbol
for
“the
gathering
of
the
nations
in
Christ”
(Augustine).58
Lactantius
identified
the
instruction
that
goes
out
from
Zion
as
the
law
of
the
new
covenant
and
Justin
Martyr
saw
this
vision
fulfilled
when
the
apostles
carried
the
gospel
to
the
world
from
Jerusalem.59
Yet
it
was
Cyril
of
Alexandria
who
discerned
the
invitation
this
text
presents.
He
writes
in
Commentary
on
Micah,
“They
who
are
eager
to
go
up
into
the
mountain
of
the
Lord
and
wish
to
learn
thoroughly
his
ways
promise
a
ready
obedience,
and
they
receive
in
themselves
the
glories
of
the
life
in
Christ
and
undertake
with
their
whole
strength
to
be
earnest
in
all
holiness.
‘For
let
everyone,’
he
says,
‘in
every
country
and
city
go
the
way
he
chooses
and
pass
his
life
as
seems
good
to
him,
but
our
care
is
Christ,
and
his
laws
we
will
make
our
straight
path;
we
will
walk
along
with
him;
and
that
not
for
this
life
only,
present
or
past,
but
yet
more
for
what
is
beyond.’”60
57
Walter
Brueggemann,
The
Prophetic
Imagination,
2nd
ed.
(Minneapolis,
MN:
Fortress
Press,
2001),
3.
58
Alberto
Ferreiro,
ed.,
The
Twelve
Prophets,
Ancient
Christian
Commentary
on
Scripture:
Old
Testament,
Volume
XIV
(Downers
Grove,
IL:
IVP
Academic,
2003),
160.
59
Ibid.
60
Ibid.,
162.

17. The
imaginative
prophetic
vision
ought
to
compel
us
to
like
the
Israelites
in
verse
5
to
commit
to
walk
in
the
present
in
the
paths
of
our
God,
both
anticipating
and
inaugurating
the
future
that
is
promised
when
Jesus
and
Zion
are
lifted
up.
Bibliography
Ben
Zvi,
Ehud.
Micah.
Volume
XXIB
–
The
Forms
of
the
Old
Testament
Literature.
Grand
Rapids,
MI:
William
B.
Eerdmans
Publishing
Company,
2000.
Biddle,
Mark
E.
“Dominion
Comes
to
Jerusalem:
An
Examination
of
Developments
in
the
Kingship
and
Zion
Traditions
as
Reflected
in
the
Book
of
the
Twelve
with
Particular
Attention
to
Micah
4-­‐5.”
In
Albertz,
Rainer,
James
Nogalski,
and
Jakob
Wöhrle,
eds.
Perspectives
on
the
Formation
of
the
Book
of
the
Twelve:
Methodological
Foundations
–
Redactional
Processes
–
Historical
Insights.
Boston:
De
Gruyter,
2012.
Brown,
F.,
S.
Driver,
and
C.
Briggs.
The
Brown-­Driver-­Briggs
Hebrew
and
English
Lexicon.
Peabody,
MA:
Hendrickson
Publishers,
1906.
Brueggemann,
Walter.
The
Prophetic
Imagination.
Second
edition.
Minneapolis:
Fortress
Press,
2001.
Brueggemann,
Walter.
“‘Vine
and
Fig
Tree’:
A
Case
Study
in
Imagination
and
Criticism.”
Catholic
Biblical
Quarterly
43,
no.
2
(Apr.
1981):
188-­‐204.
Byargeon,
Rick.
“The
Relationship
of
Micah
4:1-­‐3
and
Isaiah
2:2-­‐4:
Implications
For
Understanding
the
Prophetic
Message.”
Southwestern
Journal
of
Theology
46,
no.
1
(2003):
6-­‐26.
Ferreiro,
Alberto,
ed.
The
Twelve
Prophets.
Ancient
Christian
Commentary
on
Scripture:
Old
Testament,
Volume
XIV.
Downers
Grove,
IL:
IVP
Academic,
2003.
Hillers,
Delbert
R.
Micah.
Hermeneia.
Philadelphia:
Fortress
Press,
1984.
Mays,
James
L.
Micah.
Old
Testament
Library.
London:
SCM
Press
LTD,
1976.
Simundson,
Daniel
J.
“The
Book
of
Micah:
Introduction,
Commentary,
and
Reflections.”
In
Volume
7
of
The
New
Interpreter’s
Bible.
Nashville,
TN:
Abingdon
Press,
1996.
Wolff,
Hans
Walter.
Micah:
A
Commentary.
Translated
by
Gary
Stansell.
Minneapolis:
Augsburg
Fortress,
1990.
Wolff,
Hans
Walter.
“‘Swords
into
Plowshares’:
Misuse
of
a
Word
of
Prophecy?”
Currents
in
Theology
and
Mission
12,
no.
3
(1985):
133-­‐147.